Skip to content

Split issues command integration tests into a real module - #820

Merged
0xLeif merged 5 commits into
mainfrom
grok/2026-10-15-specsync-tests
Oct 16, 2026
Merged

0xLeif merged 5 commits into
mainfrom
grok/2026-10-15-specsync-tests

Conversation

@0xLeif

@0xLeif 0xLeif commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Move the 26 specsync issues integration tests into the real commands::issues Rust module. This reduces tests/integration/commands/specsync_process.rs from 5,962 to 4,874 lines while preserving every test body, attribute, assertion and inline fixture byte-for-byte. Shared helpers and environment isolation remain unchanged. Three companion rows use the new module paths and filters. No product behavior changes.

Independent GPT review verified the complete moved block and reconstructed the remaining file exactly apart from the pointer comment. The same 24 macOS issues cases pass before and after. Full local native qualification passes 2,582 unit and 462 integration tests, formatting/lint/types, release build, 64 release-candidate controls and 29 CI-gate controls. The release integration target compiled with --no-run; release-profile execution and the two retained Linux/Windows cfg-specific cases on their target hosts are not claimed.

The user explicitly approved this scope. The supported SpecSync 6.1.1 workflow recorded definition consent, actual verification, agent review and same-PR finalization; the change is archived. Strict canonical validation passes all 62 specs with 100% path/LOC coverage, and the final archived-tree strict lifecycle audit passes. Final committed-range Trust reports risk 32/proceed; the unchanged attestation policy passes with truthful unsigned agent:codex notes. No human code inspection or signature is claimed.

Ready for corvid-agent review after updated hosted checks complete. Exact-head external review, required CI and merge remain separate gates. Local engineering confidence exceeds 95%; this is judgment based on the preserved evidence, not a statistical guarantee.

@0xLeif
0xLeif requested a review from corvid-agent October 16, 2026 06:02
@0xLeif
0xLeif marked this pull request as ready for review October 16, 2026 14:38
@0xLeif
0xLeif requested a review from a team as a code owner October 16, 2026 14:38
@0xLeif
0xLeif requested review from 0xGaspar, Kyntrin and tofu-ux and removed request for a team October 16, 2026 14:38
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-16T14:40:24.025068Z 1920fe2 Draft marked ready
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@Kyntrin Kyntrin left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

AI-assisted review submitted at Kyntrin's request for head 1920fe23d6a4191188699fca8aaf63142fd066da. The issues integration tests are relocated into the command module; the existing exact-head automated review reports no findings and CI/Trust pass. Approving the reviewed change. This does not represent independent human code inspection or authorize merge, deployment, or any separate lifecycle approval.

@0xLeif
0xLeif merged commit 825c93e into main Oct 16, 2026
23 checks passed
@0xLeif
0xLeif deleted the grok/2026-10-15-specsync-tests branch October 16, 2026 18:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants